S/O Let's hypothetically turn the tables.

[Anonymous]

Why is this thread about pay rates.

I am the OP, and I am not even a nanny but an MB. I just wanted to (as the title said) revere the roles and see what people would think about a nanny not wanting to tell her boss that she is expecting.

Why are you having such a hard time staying on task?

[Anonymous]

This thread is about pay rates because there seems to be one poster who picks a weekly topic and tries to derail all threads to suit their own agenda. It's getting pretty tedious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this thread about pay rates.

I am the OP, and I am not even a nanny but an MB. I just wanted to (as the title said) revere the roles and see what people would think about a nanny not wanting to tell her boss that she is expecting.

Why are you having such a hard time staying on task?

MB's pregnancy has no effect on her ability to sign the nanny's checks.

The nanny's pregnancy may have an effect on her ability to nanny.

Ergo, these roles aren't reversible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this thread about pay rates.

I am the OP, and I am not even a nanny but an MB. I just wanted to (as the title said) revere the roles and see what people would think about a nanny not wanting to tell her boss that she is expecting.

Why are you having such a hard time staying on task?

MB's pregnancy has no effect on her ability to sign the nanny's checks.

The nanny's pregnancy may have an effect on her ability to nanny.

Ergo, these roles aren't reversible.

Exactly what I've been saying. Very different situations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Very interesting that Op is so offended by a pretty standard 1 to 2 buck increase for a baby. Other nannies welcome the addition of a new baby since they realize it is the most likely way to extend their current job and so put off having to job hunt again. I am sorry for you that you hate where you work so much that you don't see that as a positive thing at all.

The extended duration of any job is only a plus if it's fairly compensated. You may stop acting otherwise.
As joyous as the birth of a new baby is, caring for a new baby is a HUGE responsibility. Have you done it lately? Why do you think people routinely pay up to 30/hr for new baby care???

Stop this please. I agreed with your OP, but statements like this make you lose your credibility. Maybe 2 in 100 nannies make this much for infant care, *maybe*, and that certainly doesn't make it routine. Planes occasionally crash, but if it happened "routinely" no one would fly.

+1

I agree.. If it was that easy then EVERYONE would be nannies because it would require zero skills yet high pay.

It is that easy. I did it through highschool, college and until I got a real job in my field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this thread about pay rates.

I am the OP, and I am not even a nanny but an MB. I just wanted to (as the title said) revere the roles and see what people would think about a nanny not wanting to tell her boss that she is expecting.

Why are you having such a hard time staying on task?

MB's pregnancy has no effect on her ability to sign the nanny's checks.

The nanny's pregnancy may have an effect on her ability to nanny.

Ergo, these roles aren't reversible.

Yes because the addition of an infant is the only thing that changes

For example: A nanny should be given the choice of wanting to work with a new infant as an MB should be able to have the choice to continue employing (or giving mat leave) to pregnant nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally different situation. Nanny being pregnant means MB needs to make arrangements for when she's on maternity leave or possibly find a replacement all together.
MB being pregnant changes the job and pay. That's not something nanny is entitled to be informed about months in advance

Nanny most certainly IS entitled to her choice to either accept a realistic increase (5/hr range) in her rates to compensate the additional burden of responsibility of caring for a newborn, OR refuse, and move on to other options.

Remember, caregivers who care for babies, routinely get paid between 20-30/hr just for one infant.

I recommend that the nanny line up her next job, and give notice. Decent consideration is a TWO way street, pp. Surely you must know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Totally different situation. Nanny being pregnant means MB needs to make arrangements for when she's on maternity leave or possibly find a replacement all together.
MB being pregnant changes the job and pay. That's not something nanny is entitled to be informed about months in advance

BS! As an employer, I, too have to find a replacement and, even worse, have to hold job open for you and provide pumping room. I hate hiring women of child bearing age and am gradually hiring older women who have serious work ethic.

[Anonymous]

Oh my god.

If the job as you know it will be changing, whether because you are moving out of state or having another child, you need to tell your employee at least 4 weeks* in advance.

If you are going to be unable to perform your job, whether because you are moving or having a child, you need to tell your employers at least 4 weeks* in advance.

"In advance" means prior to any changes. So, if you have a complicated pregnancy and know you won't be able to work your third trimester, you tell your employers when you're ~5 months pregnant. If you're an MB and you plan on being home for the last month of your pregnancy, you tell your nanny a month before that. This is just the minimum requirement, ideally you'd have a relationship where you'd be able to have more open communication, but the respectful and responsible thing to do is to provide the other party with one month's notice before anything changes.

*Four weeks is industry standard, but this time frame should represent whatever you have written into your contract for giving notice.